"Natural” supplements are filled with dangerous junk

Ouch - this blog takes it to the largely
unregulated "wild west" of "natural" supplements - as they point out if "big pharma" were to rip consumers off like this they'd be in court
pronto - but it seems the illuminati/NWO/reptiloids have a soft spot for an industry that can feed us rubbish!

The researchers used a technique called DNA barcoding technology, which is a taxonomic method that uses a short genetic marker in an organism’s
DNA to identify it, even if it is mixed in with DNA from other organisms, to examine the ingredients in 44 herbal products from 12 companies in
Canada.

Results:
•Only two of the companies provided authentic products without substitutions, contaminants or fillers.
•Overall, nearly 60% of the herbal products contained plant species not listed on the label.
•Only 50% actually contained the plant claimed on the label.
•About 32% substituted another plant.
•About 20% contained contaminants of a variety of non-plant sources.
•About 20% contained fillers.

Yes, you read that right. Of the 44 herbal products studied, only about half actually contained the plant product that was claimed on the label.
Moreover, the 20% that used fillers used rice, soybeans and wheat (probably GMO, ironically).

There are plenty of natural supplements that have no additives.
Generally, really good supplements do not have the word natural in their name.
The companies that do this are commercial companies, many of which are OWNED by big pharma
They've slowly been infiltrating them for years now, as they would like to make supplements by prescription only.
This has proved hard to do, so instead, they just make supplement quality much much lower.
Let me see if I can find which pharm cos own what vitamin companies.
I've seen merck on the back of vitamin labels. I know that.
Then we have stuff like Johnson and Johnson.

There are a couple of very good companies that only use the best stuff, no additives.
I can post them if anyone is interested.

The FDA can count on mainstream media to mislead the public. Let’s get the truth out and stop this bill. Action Alert!Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL)’s
bill, S.1424, is meant to “improve the safety of dietary supplements by [requiring] manufacturers of dietary supplements to register dietary
supplements with the Food and Drug Administration and to amend labeling requirements with respect to dietary supplements.” Sounds innocuous,
doesn’t it? But as we reported in August, this is nothing but a smokescreen—a naked power grab for the FDA and an attempt to regulate safe
dietary supplements as if they were dangerous FDA-approved prescription drugs.A recent article in Newsday quotes “a top agency official”
(probably FDA’s Division of Dietary Supplement Programs director Dan Fabricant, who is quoted extensively in the article) as saying that 70% of
supplement companies have violated FDA’s manufacturing rules over the last five years—with the clear implication that such manufacturing
violations somehow puts the American public at risk.
There is no mention of the nature, context, or seriousness of these alleged violations, and no link to any official reports or documentation.The
article declares that the number of adverse events caused by supplements “outstrips” those triggered by prescriptions drugs. This is totally
false. The Newsday article’s author, Delthia Ricks, tells us that approximately “6,300 people nationwide complained about adverse reactions to
dietary supplements between 2008 and 2012, according to FDA statistics. But the actual number may be more than eight times higher, some experts say,
because most people don’t believe health products can make them sick.” This “eight times higher” claim has no basis in fact, and no documented
source.
Even if it were true, this number is far less than for prescription drugs.The 6,300 figure averages to 1,575 per year, which is extremely low
considering that 157 million Americans—half the US population—take supplements. This is in comparison to 526,527 adverse events for prescription
drugs, 275,421 of which had “serious outcomes,” including death.Why would we want to let the agency regulate supplements as if they were
drugs when the drugs they approve cause over 400 times the adverse events than supplements do? When the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
looked at the number of adverse events for supplements at the request of Senator Durbin, it was unable to uncover anything alarming, as we reported
back in March.On the contrary, the GAO report showed that FDA-approved drugs caused 80% of Poison Control fatalities. More than 100,000 calls to
Poison Control Centers, 56,000 emergency room visits, 2,600 hospitalizations, and nearly 500 deaths each year are attributed to acetaminophen
(Tylenol) alone!The Newsday article goes on to describe, in detail, the FDA’s authority to regulate the vitamin supplement industry, noting the
agency’s inspection of supplement company facilities, and its ability to issue product warnings, recalls, and seizures and levy steep fines against
companies that run afoul of FDA regulation. Inexplicably, the article then quotes Dan Fabricant as saying, “There is little the FDA can do to
exercise more power over supplement safety without an act of Congress,” and concludes that FDA has “limited power” to regulate supplements. In
what universe does that statement make sense?The only way it makes sense is if mainstream media pieces like this Newsday article are viewed as
propaganda: a concerted alliance between the media, the FDA, and legislators like Sen. Durbin to weaken the public’s determination to keep dietary
supplements freely available. Lest this sound too conspiratorial, we need to remember that drug advertising is what keeps much of print media alive
in these days of online competition.The theme of adverse events is very much echoed in Durbin’s legislation. His bill requires that the FDA,
together with the Institute of Medicine (IOM), compile a list of dietary ingredients (supplements) that might lead to adverse events, or are otherwise
deemed risky in some way—based on completely arbitrary or nonexistent standards. Given the FDA’s profound bias against supplements, and the
skewed, anti-science recommendations of the IOM’s vitamin D report, these are hardly trustworthy sources of guidance!

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.